Biblical Hebrew Forum

[George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>]

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 12:07:49 -0500 Jim West <jwest AT highland.net> writes:
> At 11:09 AM 12/22/2004, you wrote:
> 
> >This is NOT a paraphrase, in the technical sense. The New Living 
> >Translation is explicitly a translation from the original 
> languages, and 
> >as such differs from the Living Bible which was a paraphrase, i.e. 
> an 
> >adaptation within the same language, of the American Standard 
> Bible.
> 
> It is indeed a paraphrase in the correct meaning of the word- here 
> is their 
> own description:
> 
> The challenge for the translators was to create a text that would 
> make the 
> same impact in the life of modern readers that the original text had 
> for 
> the original readers. In the New Living Translation, this is 
> accomplished 
> by translating entire thoughts (rather than just words) into 
> natural, 
> everyday English.
> 
> Note- the bold prinit is their own emphasis- they don't render words 
> but 
> "entire thoughts" - i.e., they paraphrase.
> 
> Jim
> ++++++++++++++++++++
> Jim West, ThD
> Adjunct Professor of Biblical Studies
> Quartz Hill School of Theology
_____________

Jim, 

That's not the technical sense of "paraphrase" to which Peter refers.  In
the technical sense a translation begins with the text in the original
language while a paraphrase begins from an existing translation of the
text.

george
gfsomsel